I started this build back in `09 and posted the build over on the Yenko site. It's essentially a R&D dyno mule for me, something to test out parts & ideas on. I just wrapped up the first phase of testing yesterday, and despite a few minor issues, it cranked out some pretty decent numbers.

i've thought about building a "new school" 302 using a 90's LT1 block with L99 crank and rods.. top it with some LT4 heads and the HOT cam and i bet it would be an absolute blast in a lighter car with 4.10 or deeper gears, and it would be built with parts straight from GM.

__________________
"Detroit hasn't felt any real pride since George Bush went to Japan and vomited on their auto executives, I tell you whut"

[QUOTE=Tom Mobley;4617697]nice build Eric. I loved my 69 Z 302, still remember it fondly. Still the only engine I've ever owned that would run up to 7000 anytime. No special tuning or screwing around needed.[/QUOTE

I'm not sure just how "old school" you are. All through the 50's and 60's, when we bored a 283 out to 4.00, we called it a 301. The term 302 was coined by GM when they did indeed destroke a 327 back to 3.00 and called it a 302.

Most of us old guys think they got it wrong.

But regardless, just seeing those "double humps" brings back a lot of memories. Especially the ones that dictated if you had solid lifters and a 283 or 301, you had better have a scatter shield, because the things would rev like a Dygrinder.

Can you give any hints on the cam since you're going to try something else?

JIM

Jim;

Thanks

I still don't want to divulge cam specifics (don't know exactly how far off this one really is yet), but I'll say it's .700+ intake, .600+ exhaust, 300°+ intake, 310°+ exhaust, and with timing events that definitely did not agree with this combination (lol).

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackie schmidt

I'm not sure just how "old school" you are. All through the 50's and 60's, when we bored a 283 out to 4.00, we called it a 301. The term 302 was coined by GM when they did indeed destroke a 327 back to 3.00 and called it a 302.

Most of us old guys think they got it wrong.

But regardless, just seeing those "double humps" brings back a lot of memories. Especially the ones that dictated if you had solid lifters and a 283 or 301, you had better have a scatter shield, because the things would rev like a Dygrinder.

Keep us posted.

Jackie;

Rest assured, I am about as old-school as it gets. I love taking these parts everyone else considers "junk" and making big #'s with them.

That said, there's no denying "new school" technology, and there ain't no rules saying you can't apply that technology to old school parts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy's Auto Repair

Eric, cool build. Nothing so small should have that much powa!

Andy;

We've barely scratched the surface at this point...there's plenty more left to come.

At this point, my biggest personal surprise was how well that lowly ol' 3310 stood up against that HP Holley (80496). The .bsfc was notably richer @ 5000 with the 3310 and that's where the HP made a bit more power than the 3310. Aside from that, it was dang near a wash.

Not too shabby for a carb that was thrown together from my "parts donor" pile.

one of the best 3310-1 780's I ever had was built up from a bunch of parts carbs. that thing ran weekly on dirt here in Phx for over 15 years. can't even imagine how many cars/engines that thing has been on.

I did one of thes last year for a board member. It was a solid roller. They did not pull it past 6500 but it was still making power. It was 425HP at 6500. LIft was .580 and duration was in the 230 range. Sep was 110. Foxy did the intake and heads on this one.

The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.

AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.